Gee guys I only wanted opinions on SSM for the yes or no vote,,,We have copped Marxism,Liberaltarism,Religious arguments and the Bible..this has been one of the best threads since the inception of the WTs...

However it has been a great discussion with many points of view...how boring would it be if we all had the same opinion...

I love starting these threads because I have been known to be one of the most erratic people in life ..
""BUT WHO CARES "" I'm me and what you see is what you get...love you all...

Gee guys I only wanted opinions on SSM for the yes or no vote,,,We have copped Marxism,Liberaltarism,Religious arguments and the Bible..this has been one of the best threads since the inception of the WTs...

However it has been a great discussion with many points of view...how boring would it be if we all had the same opinion...

I love starting these threads because I have been known to be one of the most erratic people in life ..
""BUT WHO CARES "" I'm me and what you see is what you get...love you all...

I can understand you not mentioning the Bible as it is very embarrassing, for example, not letting a witch to live, homosexuality is an abomination. So the Bible can form the background of people's thinking even if they don't quote it. The Bible is like the devil whispering evil things in your ear.

Your getting off topic with your bigotted rantings ... it was only a matter of time before you couldn't contain yourself any longer.

As you should know, being the Biblical expert you are, the Holy Bible is the literature that forms the cornerstone of Western Civilization, the most free and compassionate of civilisations to ever exist in all of humanity. So you're more than a little off in your analysis.

Its funny you mention evil, do you believe that evil exists? It seems you do, because you have mentioned it in your response.

I ask because good, evil and morality itself cannot exist in naturalist/atheist philosophy. Nearly all intellectual atheists admit this ... yet i can bet my last dollar that you cannot explain evil without putting God firmly in the paradigm.

Probably a good idea not to start intellectual fights that you have no chance in hell of winning.

The Bible was used to it's utmost to keep civilisation brutal and stupid. It was used to justify slavery, to justify killing witches, to impede science, to corrupt philosophy, to hoodwink the ignorant, to scorn homosexuality, to prevent women from obtaining equality etc. etc..

I was obviously using the evil word in an everyday sense and you are only creating a false philosophical position in an attempt to obfuscate.

You cannot mention intellectualism and the Bible in the same breath - there are the ultimate contradiction.

Umm... basically no to everything you have just written.

It was used to abolish Slavery, it was used as the very basis for scientific reasoning, and by the way the word "witch" doesn't even appear in the original Hebrew Bible.

You have literally stuck out on every point. As The Don would say ... Sad !

Now back to my question, which you unsuccessfully tried to skirt around. Do you believe that such thing as 'Evil' exists?

I can understand you not mentioning the Bible as it is very embarrassing, for example, not letting a witch to live, homosexuality is an abomination. So the Bible can form the background of people's thinking even if they don't quote it. The Bible is like the devil whispering evil things in your ear.

Your getting off topic with your bigotted rantings ... it was only a matter of time before you couldn't contain yourself any longer.

As you should know, being the Biblical expert you are, the Holy Bible is the literature that forms the cornerstone of Western Civilization, the most free and compassionate of civilisations to ever exist in all of humanity. So you're more than a little off in your analysis.

Its funny you mention evil, do you believe that evil exists? It seems you do, because you have mentioned it in your response.

I ask because good, evil and morality itself cannot exist in naturalist/atheist philosophy. Nearly all intellectual atheists admit this ... yet i can bet my last dollar that you cannot explain evil without putting God firmly in the paradigm.

Probably a good idea not to start intellectual fights that you have no chance in hell of winning.

The Bible was used to it's utmost to keep civilisation brutal and stupid. It was used to justify slavery, to justify killing witches, to impede science, to corrupt philosophy, to hoodwink the ignorant, to scorn homosexuality, to prevent women from obtaining equality etc. etc..

I was obviously using the evil word in an everyday sense and you are only creating a false philosophical position in an attempt to obfuscate.

You cannot mention intellectualism and the Bible in the same breath - there are the ultimate contradiction.

Umm... basically no to everything you have just written.

It was used to abolish Slavery, it was used as the very basis for scientific reasoning, and by the way the word "witch" doesn't even appear in the original Hebrew Bible.

You have literally stuck out on every point. As The Don would say ... Sad !

Now back to my question, which you unsuccessfully tried to skirt around. Do you believe that such thing as 'Evil' exists?

The irony of you complaining about someone not answering your question when you still won't answer mine. Even after i tried to the bigger person and try and clean the slate.

For so many years, the homosexual community kicked and screamed about wanting their differences recognised and accepted. They wanted society to respect them for being different.
Now, they are kicking and screaming to be recognised the same as mainstream society.
They demand tolerance from us, yet do not tolerate differing opinions to theirs.
They demand acceptance, yet do not accept any outcome other than their wishes.They demand the same rights in marriage as man and woman, yet defy the only precursor to marriage . . . being a man and a woman. Let them have some sort of union legally recognised, but don't let them change the fabric of marriage as it has been for hundreds of years.
The most important reason for a NO vote is " where will this end ?". If they get their way, how long will it be before some militant lesbian with a crewcut demands to be married in a Catholic / Anglican / Muslim church, because it is legal ? And if the priest/minister of mufti refuses to marry them, she will go to some government funded lesbian rights help centre and take the church to some government funded tribunal to force them to marry them, or to force the church to change it's 2000 year old theological viewpoints to suit the current climate of political correctness and pandering to the minorities.
So for me it's a clear NO. Let them live together, let them have some sort of union recognised. But if they live their life in total contrast to the atypical man/woman union . . . . why demand that the meaning of traditional marriage is altered when they don't want to live as man/woman ?
So they want us to tolerate and accept them as they are . . . and not to try and change them. But their demands are that they don't tolerate marriage as a man/woman thing. They don't accept that marriage . . . by it's traditional definition doesn't include homosexuals . . . and so they want to change that.

This has only been the issue for a decade when Howard changed the Marriage Act to explicitly say that.

Yes, and he didn't need a plebiscite to do it either. Which shows you what a joke this whole process we are now going through is.

I have many friends who are in same sex relationships [I never thought of it as SSR until all this blew up. They were just gay before this without judgement] and I have asked them what it means to them. The responses are very interesting depending where they sit on the political dias, but the one thing that was consistent was the answer to what it means if the 'No' campaign gets up.

FWIW, They simply want to have the same legal rights as everyday people. They dont want to upset God, they dont want to flaunt there choices in my face, they just want to be able to go about their daily lives together without fear of some legal argument taking away from them.

I know its something I have no right to stop/hinder regardless of what I feel about the process in how this has played out. For me this is about giving my brothers and sisters who live in a SSR the same rights I enjoy walking down the street everyday.

Its a Big YES for me!

"Did someone buy you the internet hero play book for Christmas and you've only just started reading it?" - Nelson 21/04/2017

However the ABS said that it is important not to post pictures of your full survey form, particularly the barcode, as this is unique to you.

Mine has not arrived as well.

Anyone else Angry about the ABS making rules on the fly?
No messages? Hold on normal elections messages can be accepted and don't invalidate the vote.
"the barcode is unique to me" OK, so what if I see a few barcodes and print out what I think correct barcode sequences would be and send in 100,000 votes for "maybe".
Why, merely a year after having a Census is this question being asked NOW!

It shouldn't. Despite many left leaning people considering themselves libertarian, the far left is deeply totalitarian. They rely on blind followers who believe the far left's think-of-the-children/poor people environment/gays/etc shtick to enact their ideology.

They think of Muslims as useful idiots, but they underestimate them at their peril. They've been doing Orwellianism for centuries before it ever occurred to the far left.

I love how people categorize the Far Left..... From many I have met in the "far left", they are the most diverse group of people. Some Anarchists (aka Libertarians) believe in Zero Government. Some Communists believe in Max government, Some Minimal, others believe in Marajuwana, others I slowly back away. The Far left are incredibly diverse and different and different from each other.

The far right on the otherhand I often find suffer from Groupthink. Many say that they are Libertarian, then after stating an almost identical theology to Anarchism don't admit that they are Anarchists.

Many on the left I know have followed their ideas to their conclusions. Many on the right too, but we see some nice Hypocricy from many, recently from Ted Cruz. Ted opposed Bailouts of Hurricane victims, under any circumstances. Guess who asks for bailouts for Hurricane victims of Texas?

I will be interested to see if Tony Abbott votes with the result of the Plebiscite as he promised to do. (he was asked what's the point in a Marriage plebiscite when many against SSM said that they would vote against regardless).